Tilled vs NMI

A feature-by-feature comparison for ISVs integrating payments.

By Marcus Reed·Updated October 13, 2026

Tilled Review →NMI Review →Tilled Pricing →NMI Pricing →

Tilled gives a US platform its own facilitation capability, with compliance included and acquiring from Tilled's partners. NMI gives it a gateway with links to 200+ processors and a partner model that pays a revenue share without a facilitation registration. Both serve mainly the US, and NMI also reaches stores through terminal partnerships.

Feature Comparison

Tilled6.5

vs13 criteria

NMI6.8Winner

Feature	Tilled	NMI	Notes
Integration Architecture	7	7	Both score 7/10. Tilled: PayFac-as-a-Service infrastructure with modern REST API and webhooks. NMI: Processor-agnostic gateway connecting to 200+ processors through a single API integration.
API & Developer Experience	7	6	Tilled scores slightly higher (7 vs 6). Clean, modern API design with good documentation and sandbox environment. NMI: Functional APIs with SDKs in PHP, C#, Java; less polished than Stripe but adequate for integration
White-Label Capabilities	8	9	NMI scores slightly higher (9 vs 8). Full white-label gateway — ISVs can brand the entire payment experience including portals and onboarding. Tilled: Full white-label with branded merchant experience and custom payment flows
Processor Flexibility	4	10	NMI leads significantly (10 vs 4). Connects to 200+ processors allowing ISVs to route transactions and switch acquirers without rebuilding. Tilled: Limited to Tilled's acquiring partners; no multi-processor routing
Pricing & Fee Structure	7	7	Both score 7/10. Tilled: Transparent interchange-plus with ISV markup control; no hidden fees. NMI: Gateway-as-a-service with per-transaction fees ($0.02–$0.10); processor costs are separate and negotiable.
Omnichannel & In-Person Payments	4	8	NMI leads significantly (8 vs 4). Supports POS integrations through multiple terminal partnerships and payment devices. Tilled: Primarily online-focused with limited physical terminal support
Fraud & Security	6	5	Tilled scores slightly higher (6 vs 5). Standard tokenization and PCI scope reduction; basic fraud screening tools. NMI: Basic fraud tools and tokenization; relies on processor-level advanced fraud detection
Revenue Sharing	8	7	Tilled scores slightly higher (8 vs 7). ISVs keep 100% of their markup above interchange — transparent revenue model. NMI: Partner-first model with revenue sharing from first transaction through gateway fee markup
Merchant Onboarding	8	7	Tilled scores slightly higher (8 vs 7). Fast automated onboarding with same-day merchant activation capability. NMI: Automated TurboApp onboarding with high same-day approval rates for ISV sub-merchants
Global Reach	3	4	NMI scores slightly higher (4 vs 3). Primarily US-focused gateway; limited international acquiring compared to global processors. Tilled: US-only processing with no international acquiring capabilities
Recurring Billing	6	7	NMI scores slightly higher (7 vs 6). Built-in recurring billing and tokenized card storage for subscription management. Tilled: Basic recurring payment support through card tokenization
Customer Support	7	5	Tilled has an edge (7 vs 5). Responsive partner support team with ISV-focused technical guidance. NMI: Partner support team with account management; less self-service tooling than newer platforms
PayFac Options	9	7	Tilled has an edge (9 vs 7). Core offering is PayFac-as-a-Service — full PayFac power without the compliance burden. NMI: Partner-enabled model sits between referral and full PayFac — ISVs earn rev-share without full registration

Get this comparison as a shareable PDF

We'll send the Tilled vs NMI breakdown to your inbox — ready to share with your team.

Best for

Tilled

Best for ISVs wanting a pure PFaaS solution with maximum transparency and control over payment economics. Direct competitor to Finix for ISVs focused on payment monetization.

Visit tilled.com ↗

Best for

NMI

Best for ISVs wanting white-label gateway capabilities with multi-processor flexibility. Ideal when the ISV needs to support multiple processors or offer processor choice to merchants.

Visit nmi.com ↗

Tilled vs NMI: What ISVs Need to Know

Choosing between Tilled and NMI for embedded payments is a decision that directly impacts your ISV’s revenue model, merchant experience, and technical architecture. This comparison breaks down where each platform excels from an ISV integration perspective.

Key Differences for ISVs

The most important distinction between Tilled and NMI comes down to how each platform approaches ISV payment facilitation. Tilled and NMI take fundamentally different approaches to merchant onboarding, revenue sharing, and platform integration — and those differences matter when you’re building payments into your software.

Integration architecture varies significantly between the two. ISVs evaluating Tilled vs NMI should consider how each platform handles sub-merchant onboarding, payment splitting, and settlement timing. The right choice depends on your specific vertical, transaction volumes, and how much control you need over the merchant payment experience.

Pricing and revenue economics also differ. ISVs earn money from embedded payments through the spread between what they charge merchants and what the processor charges them. The pricing model each platform uses — flat-rate, interchange-plus, or custom — directly affects your payment revenue per transaction.

Which Platform Fits Your ISV?

The best choice between Tilled and NMI depends on your ISV’s specific requirements:

Transaction volume: Higher-volume ISVs may benefit from interchange-plus pricing, while lower-volume platforms often prefer flat-rate simplicity
Merchant type: B2B merchants have different payment needs than consumer-facing businesses
Geographic scope: International payment support varies significantly between providers
Integration depth: Some ISVs need white-label checkout while others are fine with co-branded experiences
Revenue model: How much of the payment margin you want to capture determines which platform’s economics work better

The ISV Payment Integration Perspective

For ISVs evaluating Tilled vs NMI, the comparison shouldn’t stop at processing fees. Consider the total cost of integration, ongoing maintenance, and the revenue opportunity from embedded payments. The platform that generates the most payment revenue for your ISV while providing the best merchant experience is the right choice — and that calculation is different for every software company.

Evaluate both platforms against your specific use case. Request ISV-specific pricing from each, and compare the total economics including setup costs, per-transaction revenue, and the engineering investment required to integrate and maintain each platform.